Book Reviews in Medical History Journals

IF 4.6 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Publications Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.3390/publications12020017

Ka-wai Fan

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study explores the realm of book reviews within medical history journals, an area often overlooked in the existing literature. By scrutinizing four prominent journals over a five-year period, encompassing 780 book reviews, this research elucidates prevalent trends and patterns. Findings reveal disparities in review volume and author demographics, underscored by English-language dominance. Challenges such as limited word counts and evaluation dynamics emerge as impediments to review quality. Proposed enhancements include relaxing word limits, conducting reader surveys, and fostering access to non-English literature. These strategies aim to invigorate scholarly discourse, enriching the landscape of medical history research.

查看原文本刊更多论文

医学史期刊上的书评

本研究探讨了医学史期刊中的书评领域，这是一个在现有文献中经常被忽视的领域。通过对四种著名期刊五年来的 780 篇书评进行仔细研究，本研究阐明了普遍的趋势和模式。研究结果揭示了书评数量和作者构成方面的差异，并强调了英语的主导地位。有限的字数和评价动态等挑战阻碍了书评质量的提高。建议的改进措施包括放宽字数限制、开展读者调查以及促进非英语文献的获取。这些策略旨在活跃学术讨论，丰富医学史研究的内容。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Publications Social Sciences-Library and Information Sciences

CiteScore

6.50

自引率

1.90%

发文量

审稿时长

11 weeks

期刊介绍： The scope of Publications includes: Theory and practice of scholarly communication Digitisation and innovations in scholarly publishing technologies Metadata, infrastructure, and linking the scholarly record Publishing policies and editorial/peer-review workflows Financial models for scholarly publishing Copyright, licensing and legal issues in publishing Research integrity and publication ethics Issues and best practices in the publication of non-traditional research outputs (e.g., data, software/code, protocols, data management plans, grant proposals, etc.) Issues in the transition to open access and open science Inclusion and participation of traditionally excluded actors Language issues in publication processes and products Traditional and alternative models of peer review Traditional and alternative means of assessment and evaluation of research and its impact, including bibliometrics and scientometrics The place of research libraries, scholarly societies, funders and others in scholarly communication.